Look at Eddie Bravo's multitude of wins in ADCC competition against BJJ-ka who spend most of their time in a gi and it's plain to see that if you want to win a competition without a gi, you shoudl train one without a gi.

Cassius was too nice on this.
You're fucking stupid. Bravo had ONE notable win, then got destroyed (by someone who spends a lot of time in a gi) and hasn't competed since. One is free to assume, or not, that his reticence to compete is due to a concern that losing would hurt his arguments and marketing success.

While if you're focusing on MMA, it of course makes sense to focus on no-gi (though many would argue the merits of some gi training due to a weight-vest affect) the cross-over from gi to no-gi grappling is not, in fact, that hard. You may find it educational to look at the training practices of those successful in ADCC over the last few years (they all spend a disproportionate amount of time in the gi). There are pedagogical reasons to do both, and both are fun (which is the real reason to do any of it).

Further, while you may have to fight rednecks wearing no shirts, that certainly is the exception. Most of the fights I've seen or been a part of have been in bars with no shirt, no shoes, no service policies. Then again I don't really care about "street fights".

As for multitude, you're right. Other than Gustavo and Royler, nothing else for EB in ADCC. But, I gave reasons to train no-gi, not reasons you personally should care. I could care less whether you care or not. As for weight vest effect, the gi isn't that heavy and this isn't Dragon Ball Z, last time I checked at least.

As for training both, great idea and I agree that if you have the time and the place to do so, train both. I am currently buying a gi and filing in for the two days a week of gi grappling at the Vale Tudo gym that I have started training at. But, again, when I start back with MMA comps, I will cut down to one day a week gi, then no days a week gi before comp because it's not healthy to get used to the handholds and the gi game when you fight no-gi. But since the entire thread started with the "cold weather jackets make the gi game better!" post, I put in that a) not everyone trains in cold weather climates, and b) the gi vs. no-gi thing isn't really about clothing so much as MMA training. So don't bite my head off because you could care less about street fights when the thread itself was based on idiots claiming no-gi for that specific purpose.

The weight vest thing is more metaphor than literal (obviously, gi's top out around 10 pounds). Gi's slow down rolling and the grips they afford make it harder to escape subs and positions via sweat. Whether or not that is sufficient reason to continue training in a gi if you've little intent to compete in a gi, I don't know. Some people say yes, some say no. Like I said, I don't care, it's all fun.

Necroth, my entire point of starting this admittedly silly thread was the fact that a large number of newbs on this site seem to think that gi-grappling is worthless. I just wanted to explain one situation where it is not, i.e. cold weather. Obviously no-gi has its merits, and for people in warmer climates might make more sense in a self-defense type situation. But to dismiss gi grappling as completely worthless is a ridiculously newbish mistake, that's all I was trying to point out. One is not better than the other, they are just different and both have their place which is what most of the veterans come to understand.

I see what you are trying to accomplish Ryno. Pretty good. One thing to remember is that people who want to dismiss gi grappling do so (most of the time) from the point of view of self-defense.

And these people don't stop to think (or don't know at all) that S/D will involve (most of the time) defending against some clueless punk, not against BJ Penn or Marcelo Garcia. If somebody has only trained with a gi and cannot defend himself against bare-chest John Doe (or viceversa, him who has only trained no-gi against John Doe with a trenchcoat), that's not a problem with jits gi (or no-gi).

That's a problem with him because he fucking sucks. So using hypothetical S/D scenarios to explain the advantages or dissavantages of using a gi (or no-gi) is an absurd.

The street argument is retarded. BJJ is so much overkill for the street that its ridiculous. Unless you're the idiot that picks a fight with the high school wrestling team, barring knife or gun play, the opponent shouldn't make it past double leg + ground and pound - Osiris

The assumption that everyone on the street is a "clueless punk" in s/d situations is, in itself, like all those TMA's assuming their sloppy techniques will work simply because they are using sloppy versus nonexistent technique. There are an awful lot of clued-in punks nowadays on the streets, since MMA is such a hot "fad" for the trendy. But again, s/d should not be the main focus or reason you train w/ or w/o gi. Hell, I hate the idiots who claim no-gi for that reason too, since it makes those of us who have trained primarily no-gi look like a bunch of country bumpkins/rednecks/yahoos, swilling beer and eating Tostito's while we watch Wrasslin'. I do not mean to offend those who train w/ the gi, nor do I slight it in the least. It's two different games, with some overlap. We use most of the same subs, excepting of course gi based subs (unless fighting a post-liposuction, pre-skin tuck grappler, at which point neck flaps could be used for Ezekiel/Cross choke, wherein I would not be prepared).

Anyway, we all agree that training both is really the best possible outcome. And I think we all agree that if you fight MMA or no-gi comps, training no-gi is best for you, and if you do NAGAs/Mundials/etc. that training w/ gi is best. And I know we can all agree that SFire must be ghey, as evinced by his obvious slighting of the picture linked in El Macho's sig. So. There we are.

i like your post, but you have to remember that clue-ed in punks don't necessarily mean that their skilled, they might try to do some stupid **** like a sloppy doubleleg or a guillotine or whatever, but a trained grappler should be able to take them.

I was having this conversation with my instructor on Monday because I noticed one thing about his teaching. He typically teaches the same techniques in the gi class that he teaches in the no-gi class and visa-versa.

I usually train 3-4 days a week with Friday night being a toss up to my wife she makes the call whether or not I can go train on Fridays. Otherwise its Monday 2 hours (gi and no-gi), Wednesday 2 hours (gi and no-gi), Fridays 2 hours (gi and no-gi) Saturday 2 hours (MMA and no-gi).

My instructor, a Marcio Simas brown belt and Pan-Am's vet, stated gi/no-gi is all relative and really all comes down to mat time. The more time you spend on the mat the sharper your game will get whether you roll with or without the gi. However, training at Orlando ATT we have a VERY HEAVY MMA fighter pool both pro and amature so he tries to teach techs, not all but many, that translate both with and without the gi.

You can get an ezekiel choke in no-gi. Granted it is harder, but you can get it (I'll explain it if you don't know). The stuff that really does not translate well or at all are the lapel techs (wrapping the guys own lapel around his shoulder to break his posture or trap his arm or control his hips) BUT most of the gi stuff, with some modification and adjustment, works no-gi as well.

The gi/no-gi argument has been played to death with good and bad arguments on either side. The argument that one or the other is better in a "street", sorry "5tr33t", confrontation is pointless and is entirely dependent on the very specific facts and circumstances surrounding the particular confrontation; generalizing about this or that being better for all street fights is logically flawed and useless.

The answer to the debate is simple, as is typically the case with such things, in the gi/no-gi debate it is all a matter of how the techs are presented and taught and in the end it is all about mat time.

The gi/no-gi argument has been played to death with good and bad arguments on either side. The argument that one or the other is better in a "street", sorry "5tr33t", confrontation is pointless and is entirely dependent on the very specific facts and circumstances surrounding the particular confrontation; generalizing about this or that being better for all street fights is logically flawed and useless.

Agreed. It just seems to be a common argument for many newbs dismissal of gi training. I presented a counter-point to this ridiculous and flawed argument which is admittedly laughable when seen in the context of the whole debate.